See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/238374873

Soil-nonwoven geotextile filtration behavior under contact with drainage

materials

Article  in  Geotextiles and Geomembranes · February 2006

DOI: 10.1016/j.geotexmem.2005.09.001

CITATIONS READS

34 1,676

4 authors, including:

Cho-Sen Wu Yung-Shan Hong

Tamkang University Tamkang University
29 PUBLICATIONS   416 CITATIONS    29 PUBLICATIONS   401 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Cho-Sen Wu on 05 September 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS

Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]]

www.elsevier.com/locate/geotexmem

Soil-nonwoven geotextile filtration behavior under contact with

drainage materials
Cho-Sen Wua,, Yung-Shan Honga, Yun-Wei Yanb, Bow-Shung Changb
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Tamkang University, Tamsui, Taipei 25137, Taiwan
b
Department of Civil Engineering, Tamkang University, Taipei 106, Taiwan
Received 18 September 2004; received in revised form 6 September 2005; accepted 7 September 2005

Abstract

The seepage rate and clogging potential for a soil–geotextile–drainage system were assessed using experimental tests. An ASTM
gradient ratio test apparatus was used to perform the tests by adding a drainage layer downstream of a geotextile specimen. The gradient
ratio is defined as the ratio of the hydraulic gradient through a soil–geotextile system to the hydraulic gradient through the soil alone.
Two types of drainage layers including a uniform-sized steel bead layer and a steel plate punctured with uniform-diameter holes were
used to simulate conditions downstream from a field-inserted geotextile. The direct contact between the granular particles or concrete
block and the geotextile reduced the open area for water flow. Tests performed on different bead sizes and different plate perforated areas
showed: (1) For the bead sizes used in the experiments, the smaller the open area the lower the flow discharge rate. However, the flow
discharge rate was not linearly proportional to the open area at the geotextile and steel bead interface. (2) For a drainage layer formed by
steel beads, the clogging potential increased with the reduction in open area between the geotextile and drainage material. These results
indicate that filtration tests on a drainage system without blocking materials downstream of a geotextile may underestimate the clogging
potential for the filtration system. (3) Beads of different sizes can be formed into drainage layers with the same percentage of open area.
However, the GR values exhibit minor changes when the open area remains the same.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Clogging; Drainage layer; Steel beads; Perforated plate; Open area ratio

1. Introduction (Fig. 1). Many theoretical approaches and criteria based on

When water flows through soil voids, a filtration system
composed of different sized granular particle layers is
usually applied downstream of the soil to prevent excess
soil particle loss and allow a proper degree of water flow. In
recent years, the use of geotextiles as a substitute for
graded aggregate in filtration applications has rapidly
increased. In erosion control for inland waterways or
coastal erosion protection, geotextiles are placed beneath
rip-rap or articulated concrete blocks to replace several
graded granular layers (John, 1987). Geotextiles have also
been wrapped around free-draining stone or aggregate to
form a trench drain channel in drainage applications
Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 2 26222796; fax: +886 2 26209747.
E-mail addresses: cswu@mail.tku.edu.tw (C.-S. Wu),
yshong@mail.tku.edu.tw (Y.-S. Hong).
experimental tests were developed and commonly used for
filter selections (Fischer et al., 1990). Because the behavior
of a soil–geosynthetic filtration system is influenced by
many factors such as the type of soil and geosynthetic, the
flow conditions and boundary condition, comprehensive
field boundary condition simulations become essential in
ensuring the applicability of the test results when experi-
mental test results are used as the basis for design
methodologies or as a performance evaluation of site-
specified soils.
The gradient ratio test (ASTM, 2004) is one of the
methods used in the laboratory to evaluate the clogging
potential of a soil–geotextile system. A wire mesh screen is
usually placed underneath the geotextile to support the soil
and geotextile specimen. Because the cross sectional area of
the screen is very small and water flows through the screen
support without restraint, the test set-up arrangement can

0266-1144/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.geotexmem.2005.09.001
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2 C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]]
Fig. 1. Geotextile in filtration and drainage applications. (a) Earth dam,
(b) Trench drain, (c) Bank revetment with rip-rap armour stones and (d)
Bank revetment with concrete block revetment.
be interpreted as a free drain condition downstream of the
geotextile. However, in most of the previous mentioned
engineering applications, layers of granular particles or
space filled with granular particles are placed downstream
of the geotextile to act as a protective cushion or drainage
channel (Fig. 1). Articulated concrete blocks and rip-rap
armor stones protect geotextiles from being washed out in
inland waterways or coastal erosion protection and leave
small amounts of open areas for water flow. The geotextile
has direct contact with the granular particles or concrete
block so that the contact areas could reduce the number of
pores for water flow. Flow channel blocking by down-
stream particles or concrete blocks may also alter the flow
pattern and/or deter fine particles from passing through the
geotextile specimen. Limited research has been carried out
into contact formation at the drainage–geotextile interface.
The migration of fines from a subgrade into the geotextile
was evaluated from laboratory simulation of subgrade–
geotextile–subbase system under cyclic loading (Hoare,
1982; Bell et al., 1982; Lafleur et al., 1990). Geotextile
performed as separator and a single sized subbase was used
in these tests. In a study of geotextile behavior under
unsteady flow conditions Cazzuffi et al. (1999) used cobbles
to simulate cover layer of a revetment. Lafleur et al. (1996)
used two subbase aggregates in a study to evaluate the
influence of various parameters on the ability of geotextiles
to retain fine particles pumped by traffic induced stresses.
They concluded that reducing the size of aggregate would
decrease the clogging level of the subbase. However, studies
on the blocking effect of a soil-geotextile by the drainage
particle and the influence of drainage particle size on
clogging potential are seldom found in the literature (Wu
et al., 2002). The flow rate and clogging potential
assessment for the soil–geotextile filtration system due to
the downstream blocking effect are the subjects of this
paper. A cross-section of the soil–geotextile–drainage
interface in applications and in the test set-up is shown in
Fig. 2. Instead of placing a wire mesh underneath geotextile
(Fig. 2(c)) used in the GR test, steel beads are placed
downstream of geotextile (Fig. 2(d)) to simulate contact
phenomena between granular particles and geotextile
(Fig. 2(a)) encountered in field applications (Fig. 1(a)–(c)).
The rounded shape and uniformed size steel beads used in
the present study may not totally resemble the contact
characteristics between geotextile and the graded and
irregular shaped granular fill, however, steel beads can
reflect in some sense the reduction in flow space and
impairment of filtration capability due to compression of
the geotextile by individual particle. Aside from the shape
of the flow space, the flat contact between perforated
plate and the geotextile (Fig. 2(e)) seems to be good
resemblance to the articulated concrete block in revetment
system (Fig. 2(b)).
2. Experimental program
The bridging distance between the geotextile contact
points with the aggregate leaves spaces for the water to
flow. To simulate the boundary condition at soil–geotextlie
interface and allow the flow rate and clogging potential of a
soil–geotextile filtration system to be properly simulated in
laboratory tests, the supporting screen usually used in the
gradient ratio test was replaced by a drainage layer
consisting of steel beads (Fig. 2(d)). Steel beads placed
underneath the geotextile specimen were used to imitate
drainage aggregate that has irregular contact with the
geotextile. Two nonwoven geotextiles, G1 and G2, made of
polyester were used as a filter. The tests were performed on
S2 soil. A perforated plate was placed downstream of the
geotextile specimen to simulate a concrete block in an
erosion control application (Fig. 2(e)). The perforated plate
was made by puncturing numerous single-sized holes into a
steel plate, leaving space for water to flow. A nonwoven
geotextile, G3, made of polypropylene, was also used as
filter. The tests were performed on both soil S1 and S2
specimens. Fig. 3 schematically shows the apparatus setup
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]] 3

a
d

g
f

7
6
5
h 4
3
2 i
e 1

a water supply f water inlet

b inflow CHD a
c water out flow port
d outflow CHD a
e water outflow port
a
Constant head device
g vent valve
h water outlet
i geotextile
j drainage layer or perforated plate

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of test apparatus.

2.1. Soils used for the tests

The soils used had a specific gravity of G s ¼ 2:68, density

of r ¼ 1:786 Mg/m3, d 50 ¼ 0:5 mm, emax ¼ 0:638, emin ¼
0:395, with the particle size distribution curves shown in
Fig. 4. Soil S1 had 3% and soil S2 had 13% of total weights
passing through #200 sieve.

2.2. Geotextiles

Two needle-punched nonwoven geotextiles made of

Fig. 2. Cross-section of the soil–geotextile–drainage system (not to scale).
(a) Granular materials at downstream of geotextile, (b) concrete block at
downstream of geotextile, (c) wire mesh underneath geotextile specimen in
GR test, (d) steel beads at downstream of geotextile in GR test and (e)
perforated plate at downstream of geotextile in GR test.
used in the tests. Hydraulic gradients of 1 and 5 were
applied to the filtration system. The tests were terminated
at 120 h of elapsed time as the flow rates reached relatively
stable values for all tests.
polyester, G1, G2 and one made of polypropylene, G3,
were used as filters. The properties of these geotextiles are
shown in Table 1.
2.3. Drainage layer
2.3.1. Uniform-sized steel beads
Single-sized steel beads were bonded together and
encircled by a 96 mm diameter steel ring to form the
drainage layer, as shown in Fig. 5a. The geotextile
specimen was then placed above the drainage layer and
attached to the filtrameter. Portions of the geotextile
specimen are not in contact with the steel beads as soil filled
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
4 C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]]

100

soil S1
soil S2

80
Percent finer by weight (%)

60
G3
O95
G1
O95
40
G2
O95

20

0
0.01 0.1 1 10
Grain size (mm)

Fig. 4. Particle size distributions of test soils.

Table 1
Properties of needle-punched nonwoven geotextiles used in the present
study

Geotextile G1 G2 G3
Polymer Polyester Polyester Polypropylene
Fig. 5. Steel beads drainage layer and perforated plate, (a) Drainage layer
Mass per unit area (g/m2) 250 450 320
made of 19-mm steel beads and (b) perforated plate of 54% open area
Thickness (mm) 1.4 2.5 1.8
ratio.
O95 (mm) 0.14 0.10 0.24

in the filtrameter. The contact areas between the geotextile
specimen and steel beads were measured by placing a piece
of the specimen on top of painted steel beads, the geotextile
was imprinted at the contact areas while the paint was wet.
The open area was obtained by subtracting the painted
areas from the total circular area. The open area ratio was
defined as the ratio between the open and total areas. Steel
beads with 7, 11, 14.2, 15.85, 19, 25.4, and 31.8 mm
diameters were chosen to simulate various drainage
material sizes. The open area ratios between the beads
and geotextile were 30%, 50%, 68%, 68%, 64%, 82%, and
68%, respectively. An unfended steel ring was used to
make the 100% open area ratio to simulate the free drain
condition. Specific details, together with some test results
are given in Table 2.
To evaluate the variation in discharge flow during the
test flows between the initial and final stages and between
the peak value and final stage were defined by indexes Iif
and Ipf ,
Q At the beginning of the tests, fine particles carried out by
I if ¼ f ,
Qi
Qf
I pf ¼ , (2)
Qp
where Qf , Qi and Qp are the system flows at the final and
initial stages and the peak value, respectively.
2.3.2. Perforated plate
A 96-mm diameter steel plate was punctured with 61
single-diameter holes to simulate the blocking effect of a
plane concrete block, as shown in Fig. 5(b). The geotextile
specimen and perforated plate had limited contact. The
open area ratio was defined as the ratio between the open
and total areas. Plates punctured with sixty-one 4, 7, 9 and
11 mm diameter holes created plates of 11%, 32%, 54%
and 80% open area ratios, respectively.
3. Experimental test results
3.1. Flow rate of the filtration system
3.1.1. Uniform-sized steel beads
(1)
the flow could be observed by the turbidity of the outflow
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]] 5

Table 2 0.6
Test results of filtration system using steel beads as drainage layer Open area ratio
Test No.1 (30%)
Geo- Test Open area Hydraulic Flow of discharge (ml/s) I if I pf
textile no. ratio (%) gradient Test No.3 (50%)
Initial Peak Final Test No.5 (64%)
Test No.7 (82%)
G1 1 30 1 0.26 0.27 0.15 0.58 0.56

Flow of discharge (ml/s)

0.4 Test No.9 (100%)
2 30 5 0.75 0.76 0.49 0.65 0.64
3 50 1 0.31 0.32 0.18 0.58 0.56
4 50 5 0.86 0.88 0.59 0.69 0.67
5 64 1 0.33 0.35 0.22 0.67 0.63
6 64 5 1.05 1.12 0.76 0.72 0.68
7 82 1 0.36 0.38 0.26 0.72 0.68
8 82 5 1.32 1.38 1.02 0.77 0.74
9 100 1 0.41 0.43 0.31 0.76 0.72 0.2
10 100 5 1.58 1.62 1.28 0.81 0.79
G2 11 30 1 0.24 0.26 0.12 0.50 0.46
12 30 5 0.65 0.68 0.43 0.66 0.63
13 50 1 0.28 0.29 0.15 0.54 0.52
14 50 5 0.85 0.88 0.58 0.68 0.66
15 64 1 0.30 0.31 0.18 0.60 0.58
0
16 64 5 1.00 1.03 0.70 0.70 0.68 0 2000 4000 6000 8000
17 82 1 0.33 0.34 0.21 0.64 0.62 (a) Time (min)
18 82 5 1.21 1.28 0.90 0.74 0.70
19 100 1 0.39 0.39 0.25 0.64 0.64
0.8
20 100 5 1.48 1.51 1.17 0.79 0.77
Open area ratio
Test No.31 (11%)
Test No.33 (32%)
Test No.35 (54%)
water. The flow rates reached peak values and then 0.6
Test No.37 (80%)
gradually decreased after about 30 min of elapsed time.
Flow of discharge (ml/s)

Test No.39 (100%)

The typical flow rate curves with the elapsed time are
shown in Fig. 6. The final flow rate ratios between filtration
systems with various open area ratios and 100% open area,
0.4
Q=Q100 are depicted in Fig. 7. The experimental results
reveal that the final flow rate for the filtration system
increased with the greater open area ratio. However, the
relationship between the flow rate and open area ratio for
both geotextiles was not linearly proportional. The flow 0.2
rate ratio approached linear proportions for filtration
systems tested under higher hydraulic gradients (i ¼ 5).
Fig. 8 shows the influence of the open area ratio on the
change in flow rate during a filtration test. The flow change
indexes I if and I pf decreased with smaller open area ratios, 0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000
signifying that steel beads significantly deterred the water (b) Time (min)
outflow. The flow change indexes for the tests are presented
in Table 2. The final flow rates reached 50% initial and Fig. 6. Typical flows vs. elapsed time for filtration systems, (a) geotextile
G1 tested in soil S2 with steel beads as drainage layer and (b) geotextile G3
46% peak values for a filtration system composed of tested in soil S2 with perforated plate at downstream of geotextile.
geotextile G2 and a drainage layer with 30% open area
tested at i ¼ 1. This was the most severe case. The final flow
reduction with respect to the initial or peak values was
retarded when the test was performed under higher
hydraulic gradient. open area, Q=Q100 are depicted in Fig. 9. The final flow rate
ratios for the filtration system increased with greater open
3.1.2. Perforated plate area ratio. However, the relationships between the flow
The reduction in flow discharge passing through filtra- rate and open area ratio for the nonwoven geotextile G3
tion systems formed by geotextile and perforated plate tested in both S1 and S2 soil samples exhibited a downward
combinations is less severe than that for the geotextile and convex curve. The test results show that the hydraulic
steel beads combination. The flow rate ratios between gradient has a minor effect on the relationship between the
filtration systems with various open area ratios and 100% flow rate ratio and the open area ratio. Fig. 10 shows the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
6 C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]]

1 1.2
i=1, Ipf
i=1
i=5, Ipf
i=5 1
0.8 i=1, Iif
i=5, Iif

0.8

Flow change index, I

0.6
Q/Q100

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2
0.2

0
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
(a) Open area ratio (%) (a) Open area ratio (%)

1 1.2
i=1, Ipf
i=1
i=5, Ipf
i=5
1
0.8 i=1, Iif
i=5, Iif
0.8
Flow change index, I

0.6
Q/Q100

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2
0.2

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0
0 20 40 60 80 100
(b) Open area ratio (%)
(b) Open area ratio (%)
Fig. 7. The ratio of final flow rate between filtration systems of various
Fig. 8. Flow change index vs. open area ratio of filtration system (steel
open area ratio and 100% open area (steel bead drainage layer): (a)
bead drainage layer): (a) geotextile G1 and (b) geotextile G2.
geotextile G1 and (b) geotextile G2.

influence of the open area ratio on the change in flow rate
during a filtration test. The flow change indexes, I if and I pf ,
showed a minor variation with the open area ratio for soil
S1. Specific details, together with some test results are given
in Table 3.
In Figs. 7 and 9 the points at (0, 0) have not been
obtained experimentally but assumed, it is likely that
filtration system with open area ratios less than the lowest
test one would yield higher final flow rate ratios than those
presented by the straight lines connecting the points (0, 0)
and the first test data.
3.2. GR values
3.2.1. Uniform-sized steel beads
The relations between the GR value and the open area
ratio for the tests are presented in Fig. 11. The GR value
increased as the open area ratio decreased. This indicates
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]] 7

1 1.2

i=1
i=5 1
0.8

0.8

Flow change index, I

0.6
Q/Q100

0.6

0.4
0.4 i=1, Ipf
i=5, Ipf
0.2 i=1, Iif
0.2
i=5, Iif

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 20 40 60 80 100
(a) Open area ratio (%) (a) Open area ratio (%)

1 1.2

i=1
i=5
1
0.8

0.8
Flow change index, I

0.6
Q/Q100

0.6

0.4

0.4 i=1, Ipf

i=5, Ipf
0.2
i=1, Iif
0.2
i=5, Iif

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0
0 20 40 60 80 100
(b) Open area ratio (%)
(b) Open area ratio (%)
Fig. 9. The ratio of final flow rate between filtration systems of various
Fig. 10. Flow change index vs. open area ratio of filtration system
open area ratio and 100% open area (perforated plate at downstream of
(perforated plate at downstream of geotextile): (a) soil S1 and (b) soil S2.
geotextile G3): (a) soil S1 and (b) soil S2.

that steel beads downstream of the geotextile increase the
clogging potential of a soil-geotextile filtration system. The
greater the percentage of flow space blocked by the beads,
the higher the system clogging potential. The GR value
ratio between the drainage layers and free drain GR/GR100
are shown in Fig. 12. The GR value ratio GR/GR100
decreases as the open area ratio increases. The ratio
approaches an inverse linear proportion to the open area
ratio for the tested open area ranges. A higher hydraulic
gradient decreases the clogging potential for a certain open
area ratio.
3.2.2. Perforated plate
The GR values for a filtration system with a perforated
plate downstream of the geotextile are presented in Fig. 13.
The GR value increased as the percentage of flow space
blocked by the plate increased. The upward concave curves
show that the increase in GR value with respect to the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
8 C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]]

Table 3
Test results of filtration system with perforated plate at downstream of geotextile

Soil Test no. Open area ratio (%) Hydraulic gradient Flow of discharge (ml/s) I if I pf

Initial Peak Final

S1 21 11 1 0.84 1.14 0.96 1.14 0.84

22 11 5 3.67 3.85 3.76 1.02 0.98
23 32 1 1.33 1.68 1.51 1.14 0.90
24 32 5 5.97 6.34 6.15 1.03 0.97
25 54 1 1.65 2.10 1.93 1.17 0.92
26 54 5 7.53 7.93 7.80 1.04 0.98
27 80 1 1.97 2.34 2.20 1.12 0.94
28 80 5 9.02 9.39 9.20 1.02 0.98
29 100 1 2.17 2.52 2.41 1.11 0.95
30 100 5 9.88 10.19 10.13 1.03 0.99

S2 31 11 1 0.20 0.22 0.10 0.50 0.45

32 11 5 0.93 1.02 0.73 0.78 0.72
33 32 1 0.34 0.36 0.23 0.68 0.64
34 32 5 1.35 1.37 1.28 0.95 0.93
35 54 1 0.47 0.48 0.33 0.70 0.69
36 54 5 2.17 2.22 2.07 0.95 0.93
37 80 1 0.50 0.53 0.38 0.76 0.72
38 80 5 2.53 2.58 2.37 0.94 0.92
39 100 1 0.52 0.56 0.40 0.77 0.71
40 100 5 2.67 2.75 2.47 0.93 0.90

1.5 1.6

G1, i=1 G1, i=1

1.4 G2, i=1 G2, i=1
G1, i=5 G1, i=5
1.3 1.4
G2, i=5 G2, i=5
1.2
GR/GR100

1.1
1.2
GR

1.0

0.9
1.0
0.8

0.7
0.8
0.6 0 20 40 60 80 100
0 20 40 60 80 100 Open area ratio (%)
Open area ratio (%)
Fig. 12. The ratio of GR values between filtration system of various open
Fig. 11. GR value vs. open area ratio in filtration system using steel bead area ratio and free drain (steel bead drainage layer).
drainage layer.

3.3. Different bead sizes forming drainage layers with the

reduction in open area subsides sharply. The GR value
ratios between the filtration system with various open area
ratios and free drain GR/GR100 are shown in Fig. 14. The
ratio approaches an inverse linear proportion to the open
area ratio for the greater open area ratios.
same open area ratio
In forming a drainage layer, beads fitted into the steel
ring must be a whole. Therefore, beads with 14.2, 15.85,
and 31.8 mm diameters create the same open area ratio of
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]] 9
2.4
3.5
S1, i=1
S1, i=1
S1, i=5
S1, i=5
S2, i=1
3.0 S2, i=1 2.0
S2, i=5
S2, i=5

GR/GR100
2.5
1.6
GR

2.0

1.2

1.5

0.8
0 20 40 60 80 100
1.0 Open area ratio (%)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Open area ratio (%) Fig. 14. The ratio of GR values between filtration system of various open
area ratio and free drain (perforated plate at downstream of geotextile).
Fig. 13. GR value vs. open area ratio in filtration system using perforated
plate.

Table 4
Flow change indexes and GR values for different beads forming the same open area

Geotextile Test no. Diameter of steel Hydraulic gradient Flow of discharge (ml/s) I if I pf GR value
beads (mm)
Initial Peak Final

G1 41 14.20 1 0.34 0.35 0.23 0.68 0.66 1.13

42 14.20 5 1.15 1.16 0.85 0.74 0.73 0.84
43 15.85 1 0.34 0.36 0.22 0.65 0.61 1.14
44 15.85 5 1.16 1.17 0.84 0.72 0.72 0.85
45 31.80 1 0.33 0.34 0.21 0.64 0.62 1.15
46 31.80 5 1.14 1.15 0.83 0.73 0.72 0.88
G2 47 14.20 1 0.32 0.34 0.20 0.63 0.59 1.16
48 14.20 5 1.13 1.17 0.81 0.72 0.69 0.96
49 15.85 1 0.31 0.32 0.19 0.61 0.59 1.18
50 15.85 5 1.09 1.11 0.77 0.71 0.69 0.97
51 31.80 1 0.31 0.33 0.19 0.61 0.58 1.20
52 31.80 5 1.07 1.09 0.75 0.70 0.69 0.97

68%. The experimental results presented in Table 4 reveal
that the discrepancy of flow change indexes Iif and Ipf
among filtration systems built using three different bead
sizes were insignificant. The tested GR values on both
geotextiles at different hydraulic gradients also showed less
than 5% variation among the three systems. This
phenomenon indicates that the clogging potential for a
filtration system is influenced by the open area ratio rather
than the bead size.
4. Conclusions
In a gradient ratio test, two types of drainage channels, a
perforated plate and a drainage layer formed by steel
beads, were placed downstream of a geotextile specimen to
simulate different soil–geotextile filtration system bound-
aries. The experimental results show: (1) a drainage layer
formed by steel beads or a perforated plate deters the water
flow and the lower the amount of open area, the lower the
flow discharge rate. However, the final flow discharge rate
was not linearly proportional to the open area in the steel
bead–geotextile interface or the punctured area for the steel
bead sizes and punctured sizes used in this experiment. (2)
When steel beads or a perforated plate are used to form a
downstream drainage layer, the clogging potential in-
creases with the reduction in the open area, indicating that
a 100% open or free drain experimental result under-
estimates the clogging potential of a filtration system. (3)
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
10 C.-S. Wu et al. / Geotextiles and Geomembranes ] (]]]]) ]]]–]]]
Steel beads of different sizes can be formed into drainage
layers with the same percentage of open area. The GR
values and flow rates have only minor changes as long as
the open area remains the same. This shows that the open
area should be an important concern in assessing the
clogging potential and flow rate of a filtration system.
Steel beads and perforated plate are used to simulate
contact characteristics between geotextile and downstream
drainage. However, in the present study the geotextiles
used for steel beads and perforated plate tests are different,
it was missed an opportunity to directly compare the
filtration performance of different downstream boundaries.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the National Science
Council of the Republic of China for financially supporting
this research under Contract no. NSC90-2211-E032-020.
References
ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials), 2004. Annual Book
of ASTM Standards, D 5101-01, Section 4, vol. 04.13.
Bell, A.L., McCullough, L.M., Snaith, M.S., 1982. An experimental
investigation of subbase protection using geotextiles. In: Proceedings
View publication stats
of Second International Conference on Geotextiles, Las Vegas, United
States, vol. 2, pp. 435–440.
Cazzuffi, D.A., Mazzucato, A., Moraci, N., Tondello, M., 1999. A new
test apparatus for the study of geotextiles behavior as filters in
unsteady flow conditions: relevance and use. Geotextiles and
Geomembranes 17 (5–6), 313–329.
Fischer, G.R., Christopher, B.R., Holtz, R.D., 1990. Filter criteria based
on pore size distribution. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International
Conference on Geotextiles, Geomembranes and Related Products, The
Hague, The Netherlands, vol. 1, pp. 289–294.
Hoare, D.J., 1982. A laboratory study into pumping clay through
geotextiles under dynamic loading. In: Proceedings of Second
International Conference on Geotextiles, Las Vegas, United States,
vol. 2, pp. 423–428.
John, N.W.M., 1987. Geotextiles, Blackie, Glasgow, UK, Chapter 3,
pp. 56–67.
Lafleur, J., Assi, M., Mlynarek, J., 1996. Behavior of nonwoven
geotextiles under pumping loads. Recent Developments in Geotextile
Filters and Prefabricated Drainage Geocomposites. In: Bhatia, S. K.,
Suits, D. (Eds.), ASTM STP 1281, pp. 211–221.
Lafleur, J., Rollin, A.L., Mlynarek, J., 1990. Clogging of geotextiles under
pumping loads. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Con-
ference on Geotextiles, Geomembranes and Related Products, The
Hague, The Netherlands, vol. 1, pp. 189–192.
Wu, C.S., Hong, Y.S., Yan, Y.W., Chang, B.S., 2002. The influence of the
drainage particle contact area on soil-nonwoven geotextile filtra-
tion behavior. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference
on Geosynthetics. A. A. Balkema Publishers, Nice, France,
pp. 1079–1082.